Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39169455›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2024

Markers of too little effort or too much alertness during neuropsychological assessment: Demonstration with perioperative changes.

Dana Baron-Shahaf, Goded Shahaf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Dana Baron-ShahafNeuro Anesthesia Unit, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel.
Goded ShahafApplied Neurophysiology Laboratory, Rambam Healthcare Campus, Haifa, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2674-3585

Funding

Ministry of Health, State of Israel 3-17472
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCognitive assessment is based on performance in different tests. However, this performance might be hindered by lack of effective effort on the one hand, and by too much stress on the other hand. Despite their known impact, there are currently no effective tools for measuring cognitive effort or stress effect during cognitive assessment. We developed real-time electrophysiological markers for cognitive effort and for stress effect, which could be used during cognitive assessment.

methodsWe assessed these markers during the use of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) before and after cardiac surgery, which is known to involve cognitive decline in up to 30%-50% of elderly patients.

resultsThe major findings of the study, for the largest group of patients, with preoperative MoCA in the intermediate range, were that the decline is significantly associated (1) with higher preoperative cognitive effort and (2) with higher postoperative stress effect during the test.

conclusionsThese findings, as well as preliminary additional ones, suggest a potential importance for monitoring cognitive effort and stress effect during assessment in general, and specifically during perioperative assessment. SIGNIFICANCE: Easy-to-use markers could improve the efficacy of cognitive assessment and direct treatment generally, and specifically for perioperative decline.

Indexed as

Mental Status and Dementia TestsAgedAged, 80 and overAttentionCardiac Surgical ProceduresCognitionCognitive DysfunctionElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsPerioperative PeriodStress, Psychologicalcognitive assessmentcognitive effortEEGmonitoringstress effect

Identifiers

PMID39169455
PMCPMC11338839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.